Learn Better, Remember Longer

      Studying is a difficult, but necessary, part of the education experience. Massive, high-stakes exams are all too common in universities and encourage students to concentrate their study efforts on their subject in the days leading up to their exam, rather than gradually building and refreshing their knowledge as they progress through the course’s content. The consequence of these short, intense study days is that the knowledge gathered by the students is almost immediately forgotten shortly after the test has ended. Though this study method often yields desirable grades for the students, they do not retain the foundational skills and knowledge necessary to be successful in subsequent courses. In this cramming-and-testing education cycle, students are simply holding on to information long enough to answer any relevant exam questions so that they can get the grade they want and progress through their program. In this way, students are not learning for the sake of learning, but rather for the sake of passing. And although passing is an indispensable goal for all students, the lack of retention for course materials leaves the student poorly equipped for the challenges of more advanced material that future courses will offer. 

       Scientists have long known that spacing out learning and revisiting material that is not yet mastered can improve memory for that material, both for the test and beyond. For example, re-examining content from a class a week ago has been found to increase memory for that class’s material. Unfortunately, the education system at all levels (elementary school, high school, university, and college) heavily lends itself to high-stakes testing (in which a colossal chunk of a student’s grade is based on a few short tests). Although most students love the idea of a few quick (but tough) exams in their seemingly distant futures, the skills and knowledge gained evaporates soon after the test has ended. Even if students what to maximize their studying potential by incorporating short reviews of past material into their weekly routines, they can often become flabbergasted with the sheer volume of material that they feel they have to review – these well-intentioned students can be unsure of where to focus their studying attention.

        Enter DASH. A computerized teaching tool that takes advantage of scientific theories on memory and accounts for both individual learning styles and typical patterns of learning and forgetting. This program developed out of research jointly conducted at the University of Colorado and the University of California. DASH was created using three important aspects of the student and the study process: the Difficulty of the material, the Ability of the student, and the Study History (or how the student has studied the material in the past). These three aspects work in the computer program to review material for the student when they need it most. Based on quizzes from the previous week’s materials, the DASH program devoted a certain among of time to reviewing the necessary chapters with the student. 

To test the effectiveness of their computerized teaching tool, the researchers provided 179 eighth-grade children with computer based Spanish language instruction. Students learned Spanish during a ten week period in using each of three computerized teaching tools; the personalized DASH system, a mass chapter-by-chapter technique (that presented new material each week without review of the previous week’s material much like a standard classroom environment might), or a spaced out study technique (that would begin each new week with a brief review of the previous week’s material). A third of each of the chapter’s content was taught using each of the techniques, so that each student used each technique throughout the process (this practice reduces differences in performance that may be due to factors that are not the study techniques, like intelligence or motivation). At the end of the ten weeks of computer-based Spanish learning, the students were given an exam that tested their learning. The results showed promising support for DASH. Student answered 12 more questions correctly that were learned using DASH  compared to the mass chapter-by-chapter technique, and eight questions more than material learned using the spaced out study technique. These results show that the DASH program was able to increase knowledge about the material, thus indicating that the use of this personalized, spaced-study technique can yield better marks for students immediately after a course has finished, relative to a chapter-by-chapter technique or an impersonal spaced-study technique. 

            

       

            But what about learning beyond the course? Students were given a similar exam 28 days removed from their program to test how much knowledge they had retained. Items learned using DASH were better remembered that items learned with the chapter-by-chapter and the impersonal-spaced learning techniques nearly a month later. On average, over 16 more questions (out of 100) were answered correctly when items were learned using DASH, compared to the chapter-by-chapter technique. Ten more questions (out of 100) were answered correctly when the material was learned using DASH, compared to the impersonal-spaced learning technique. In other words, not only did DASH continue to reduce forgetting, this forgetting was still reduced 28 days after their course had ended – the advantage for DASH items broadened at the later test date – DASH content was remember more than content from other techniques. 

            Students are not retaining the skills that they acquire and the knowledge that they learn. The DASH program shows an effective learning strategy that can both improve performance on tests and increase the preservation of information taught. Although the high-stakes testing techniques of the education system are desirable for some students and easy for educators, this type of testing is associated with rapid forgetting of learning information. Unfortunately, many students view education as the progression through courses by any means necessary – not as the gradual acquisition of knowledge for better performance in the future (both in the classroom and beyond). The DASH program illustrates the effectiveness of a personalized spaced learning program and incorporates current theories of memory and differences in individual’s skill in order to formulate the ideal weekly study plan for students using the program. 

Adam Newton                                       

Lindsey, R. V., Shroyer, J. D., Pashler, H., & Mozer, M. C. (2014). Improving students’ long-term knowledge retention through personalized review. Psychological Science. In Press. 

Shooting Down the Stars

        We’ve all heard it before –complaints at work or in the classroom that target the “keeners”. These complaints usually focus on how an individual is making the rest of the group ‘look bad’ or how ‘all they ever do is work!’. Sometimes it is hard to contain our bitterness toward high-achievers, especially when our own performance has been found lacking. Although such water cooler griping may be dismissed as blowing off steam or venting our frustrations, how does it affect the lives of those high-achievers targeted by our workplace winging? According to research by Kim and Glomb (2014) the answer appears to be quite a bit, with high-achieving co-workers often being the targets of harmful interpersonal behaviours that result in lower productivity, organizational performance, and general well being. It is clear that this is an important issue for employers and employees; by discouraging our most productive co-workers we encourage sliding standards, and undermine the practice of hiring skilled employers in the first place.

        

        Before you go beating yourself up for off the cuff remarks made to your friends, consider the fact that institutions themselves share a portion of the blame. Employees may participate in harmful behaviour towards their high-performing counterparts in order to remove or reduce the advantages provided to them by employers (Smith & Kim, 2007). Additionally, employers are often responsible for identifying and praising ‘star’ employees, rather than the group as a whole. As a result, other employees may feel that their contribution is undervalued and begin to resent those individuals who are recognized by their organization.

        What sort of recognition may inspire envy in others? As you might expect, differences in salary can contribute to co-workers envying one another, but so can perceptions of performance on a given task. It’s not just money that may lead one to talk, but also the perception that your co-worker is simply doing a better job (Glomb & Kim, 2014).

By comparing our performance with that of another higher performing coworker we may be breeding envy and harming our professional identity. This envy may influence the victimization of ‘superstars’ in our workplace environment, and thereby reduce the productivity of the entire workplace. Whether or not we participate in such victimization, a hostile work environment that punishes employees who perform well is not someplace any of us want to work.

        However, not everyone in the workplace is subject to our bitterness; the majority of our griping will probably be directed toward those members who work in groups outside of our own (Glomb & Kim, 2014). Perhaps it is because we associate the success of our work group with our own, or maybe it is simply the case of proximity and everyday interaction builds relationships that help to reduce workplace victimization. Whatever the case, it is important that employers take the victimization of their highest performing employees seriously in order to reduce the toxic effects of their co-workers’ envy.

                  

        But what can employers do to stop the victimization of their employees? First, employers need to stop recognizing the individual over the group. Although it is important to recognize individual achievement, such recognition should be given privately and should never take precedence over the combined efforts of all employees involved in a given project. Secondly, employers need to keep the details of how employees are paid a secret. This means not announcing bonuses or making off the cuff remarks about how an employee’s pay will reflect their efforts. Lastly, employers need to foster the type of team building exercises that help to promote a sense of community in the workplace. Employees that build productive workplace relationships may be less likely to pounce on one another because of a little extra praise from the boss.

                 
        It is not just employers that can help to reduce the likelihood of workplace victimization; employees can lend a hand as well. The most important step we can all take to reduce our envy toward high performing employees is perhaps the most straightforward: stop comparing our efforts to others and start focusing on our own improvements. By focusing on our progress and outperforming our previous best, we can feel more satisfied with our work in general and perhaps avoid the envy that causes us to hurt our peers. However, it is not just the gripers that can help reduce workplace envy. The superstars among us can also help by avoiding the spotlight and practicing humility when being recognized (Kim & Glomb, 2014). Although this may at first appear to be victim blaming, acting with humility really should be a personal goal for everyone. After all, nobody likes a whiner, but we’re not too fond of braggarts either.

Kim, E., & Glomb, T. M. (2014). Victimization of high performers: The roles of envy and work

        group identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035789

Smith, R. H., & Kim, S. H. (2007). Comprehending envy. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 46-64.

        doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.46

Rorshack blogger Adam Newton has an op-ed article on eating disorders in today's London Free Press. You can check it out here: http://www.lfpress.com/2014/02/06/newton-there-is-no-cure-for-eating-disorders-there-are-however-many-treatment-groups

Congratulations Adam!

The Wide Face Advantage in Speed Dating

With Valentine’s Day fast approaching perhaps you, along with many others are debating trying speed dating! An interesting new study has offered evidence that men’s facial width provides an advantage during speed dating events in regards to being chosen for a second date, and higher interest from women in short term relationships.

*******

Women may perceive men with wider faces as more dominant and more attractive for short-term relationships, according to a new study found in Psychological Science. 

The study shows that within three minutes of meeting in real life, women find more dominant, wider-faced men attractive for short-term relationships, and want to go on another date with them, according to psychological scientist and lead researcher Katherine Valentine of Singapore Management University.

According to Valentine, there’s considerable academic debate about whether physical dominance is advantageous in mating – that is, actually attractive to women. At the same time, researchers have been exploring facial width-to-height ratio as a possible physical indicator of male dominance.

This new study, she says, addressed both issues:

High male facial width-to-height has previously been associated with surviving in hand-to-hand combat, aggressiveness, self-perceived power, and CEO’s financial success. The study shows it’s also a reasonably good indicator of perceived dominance – not only that, it piques women’s interest in a face-to-face speed-dating setting.

Valentine and colleagues hypothesized that increased facial width-to-height, due to its link with testosterone, would make men seem more dominant and more desirable as romantic interests in the short-term. But, because facial width is also linked with undesirable traits like aggression, women would not see these men as more desirable for long-term relationships.

                        

The researchers studied over 150 men and women, ages 18 to 32, who participated in one of several speed-dating events. The participants were all single and they received no compensation other than the prospect of making a potential romantic match. Each speed-dating interaction lasted 3 minutes.

Male speed-daters with higher facial width-to-height, as measured by computer software, were independently rated as more dominant. Women not only expressed more interest in short-term relationships with these men, but were also more likely to choose them for a second date. These associations held even after the researchers accounted for the men’s age and independently-rated attractiveness.

Further analyses suggest that the link between higher facial width-to-height and greater interest in a short-term relationship could be accounted for, at least in part, by perceived dominance.

The fact that facial width-to-height predicted whether women wanted another date with a man came as a surprise: Previous studies have found that women prefer more dominant men for short-term relationships, but almost all of these studies were based in the lab and did not involve an interaction that could actually lead to mating and dating. The fact that women wanted to see these men again suggests that the findings are robust – women aren’t just saying they are interested, they’re actually willing to be contacted by these men.

So what does this mean to you? Keep in mind that having a wider face could possibly help secure a second date or interest from women in a short- term relationship. While these results compliment a wide body of similar research on facial-metrics and attraction, this information should be taken with a grain of salt.

So why not try something new this Valentine’s Day and give speed dating a shot! Remember to keep an open mind and have some fun…Who knows what could happen!

Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., Penke, L., & Perrett, D. I. (2014). Judging a Man by the Width of His Face The Role of Facial Ratios and Dominance in Mate Choice at Speed-Dating Events. Psychological science, 0956797613511823.

Close your Eyes and Remember: Folk Myth or Scientific Fact?

“Close your eyes and remember” is likely a phrase that you have heard before. To some, closing your eyes to remember information or events may be considered intuitive, while to others, the idea may simply resemble some mythical folk statement that could not possibly be true. Either way, you have hopefully started to wonder yourself whether or not eye-closure really can benefit your memory, and if it can, why such a phenomenon occurs. With that in mind, let’s get to what the scientific literature has to say on the subject.

Starting with a general overview, it is often found that eye-closure can indeed benefit a person’s ability to remember both visual and auditory details of events. As to why what is termed the “eye-closure effect” occurs, scientists usually employ what is known as the cognitive load hypothesis in their explanation. The cognitive load hypothesis, which is grounded in Glenberg’s (1997) account of embedded cognition, says that eye-closure helps improve memory by freeing cognitive resources that normally would have been used to monitor the environment (Vredevelt et al, 2011). Put simply; when you close your eyes, your brain is receiving less incoming information, and thus is able to devote more of its processing capabilities towards other tasks, which in this case would be memory. Those with pessimistic views of the eye-closure effect however, would state (after reading the literature) that these findings were only obtained in lab settings, and thus are not generalizable to read world scenarios. Luckily enough, recent research at the University of York tackles just this issue.

            In this study, Vredevelt and Penrod (2013) looked at whether memory for a forensically relevant live event was influenced by both eye-closure condition (i.e. eyes open or closed) and location (i.e. inside or outside) at the time of the subsequent interview about the event. In the experiment, 96 students witnessed a staged verbal altercation between two confederates. After witnessing this altercation, participants were interviewed about the events they just witnessed in one of two locations: the sidewalk next to a busy street, or inside a quiet corridor. The interview consisted of both a free recall (i.e. tell me everything you remember about the event) and a cued recall (i.e. “what did the male say” or “who started the argument”) questions. During the interview, the participants were instructed to either keep their eyes open or to keep their eyes closed.

            For free recall conditions, it was found that overall, those who closed their eyes (in comparison to those who kept their eyes open) reported more correct and detailed information in both visual and auditory modalities. Furthermore, these increases in recall were not accompanied by decreases in overall testimonial accuracy (i.e., they did not report more correct answers because they gave more responses, correct or incorrect, in general). One caveat of these findings however, was that these benefits were only significant in the quieter, inside interview condition (vs. the noisier outside viewing condition). For the cued recall condition, it was found that participants who closed their eyes reported more detailed information with regards to only the visual aspects of the witnessed event, an improvement that was again accompanied by no decreases in overall testimonial accuracy.

Close your eyes, you may not have to remember this moment because of it.

            So what do these findings mean for you? For starters, it means that closing your eyes can benefit your memory in real world conditions (especially in free recall). Furthermore, it also suggests that if you are going to try to benefit from closing your eyes to remember, you should try to do so in a quiet, less busy environment (which is consistent with the cognitive load hypothesis, as noisy environment would only create more things for your brain to process). Regarding the practical uses of these findings, a readily apparent application could be police interview strategies. Asking witnesses to close their eyes while they try to freely recall an event is something simple. It requires no complex training and takes no more time than any current measures, yet despite this simplicity, it has the potential to increase both how much the witness recalls, and the detail to which the witness can go into. As far as how this information can benefit you in your daily life, just think of how much frustration you go through when, for example, you lose your keys/phone/other important object. Instead of taking 15 minutes to reacquaint yourself with anxiety, you might consider taking a minute or two of your time to close your eyes and retrace your steps, as it may help you keep your cool and your keys. At the end of the day, the research in this area goes to show that sometimes old sayings can indeed have some merit, and regardless of whether or not you are fully convinced, at least you have another topic to talk about to intrigue your relatives.

-Rylan Waring

Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.           doi:10.1017/S0140525X97000010

Vredeveldt, A., Hitch, G.J., & Baddeley, A.D. (2011). Eyeclosure helps memory by reducing cognitive load and enhancing visualisation. Memory & Cognition, 39, 1253-1263. doi:  10.3758/s13421-011-0098-8.

Vredeveldt, A., & Penrod, S, D. (2013). Eye-closure improves memory for a witnessed event    under naturalistic conditions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19 (10), 893-905

‘I’m Sorry about the Rain!’ – A trust building device

        Want people to trust you? Try apologizing for the rain. A new study by Allison Brooks and her colleges at Harvard Business School found that apologizing for things that are clearly out of your control, such as the weather, increases peoples trust in you.

“Hi Folks. Well, I’m sorry about the rain.”
     - President Bill Clinton, 1995

        In the past an apology has typically been defined as admitting your blamefulness and asking for forgiveness, but with Brook’s findings a whole new meaning and use has been given to the traditional apology. Brooks states that by giving a superfluous apology (apologizing for something that is outside of your control), the apologizer has taken the victims perspective and expressed empathetic concern towards the victim, which leads them to believe the apologizer is kind and concerned about their well-being.

The study consisted of four experiments, 3 lab studies and one field study in which a confederate approached strangers on a train platform (on a rainy day), and apologized for the rain then asked to use their cell phone. 47% of people let the stranger use their phone when he started off by apologizing for the rain, while only 9% of people let the stranger use their phone when he didn’t apologize for the weather, and just asked to use their device.

        Apologizing for something out of your control is even better than a real apology, or a polite greeting. In another experiment the group ran through an online survey, they found that participants rated a confederate the most trustful when they used a superfluous apology (in this case “I’m sorry your flight was delayed”), compared to using a polite greeting (“How are you?”), or a traditional apology (“Sorry for interrupting”).

        Wondering what power an ‘I’m sorry’ truly holds? “Superfluous apologies are a powerful and easy-to-use tool for social influence. Even in the absence of culpability, individuals can increase trust and liking by saying “I’m sorry”- even if they are merely “sorry” about the rain.” Brooks concludes.
Perhaps with this knowledge your future rainy days will be brighter.

-Jesica Mikkila

Resource: Alison Wood Brooks, Hengchen Dai, and Maurice E. Schweitzer (2013). I’m Sorry About the Rain! Superfluous Apologies Demonstrate Empathic Concern and Increase Trust. Social Psychological and Personality Science DOI:10.1177/1948550613506122 

Why the Living Love the Dead

The walking dead was the most popular TV drama in 2013, what is it about the half-human monstrosities called zombies that has enthralled audiences since the Night of the Living Dead in 1969? The glimmer of distorted humanity in zombies is perhaps their most disturbing feature. Mannequins, wax figures, and ventriloquist dummies all share a disturbing similarity to humans.  The guttural dislike that people feel for things that appear too close to human was called the Uncanny Valley Effect by Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori in 1970.  Mori hypothesized that as robots become more humanlike they are more likable until a certain point when they appear too close to human but with subtle features that look wrong confusing the observer making them repulsive. He suggested the living dead would be the perfect example of the Uncanny Valley phenomenon.

A 2013 Japanese study examined a cognitive explanation for the Uncanny Valley effect in a series of experiments. Yamada, Kawabe, and Ihaya had participants identify pictures that were a mix of a person and a Charlie brown doll, or a cartoon person with varying degrees of each picture, for example one picture would be 20% human and 80% cartoon. Participants identified what the pictures were of, and the rated how much they liked the mixed pictures. The researchers thought that more mixed pictures would be harder for people to identify, so the mixed pictures would take longer to identify than pure ones. They also thought that difficulty identifying whether a picture was human would be uncomfortable making people dislike mixed pictures. Participants were significantly slower at identifying the mixed pictures than pure pictures, and they liked the mixed pictures less than the pure ones.  

Does uncanny similarity between real and fake make us uncomfortable only when we see almost real humans, or could the effect generalize to other species? The researchers decided to test whether people would have the same reactions to pictures of dogs in their second experiment that they bad to humans in their first experiment. The pictures in the second experiment were mixed with various degrees of real dog and either a cartoon dog, or a stuffed Snoopy doll. Again participants had to identify the subject of the picture that they were shown, and then rated the likability of the pictures. The same results appeared using pictures of dogs that had appeared using pictures of humans. The mixed pictures took participants longer to identify, and were less likable. This means that the Uncanny Valley effect is not only applicable to things that look nearly human; identification difficulty can make anything less likable.

Categorization difficulty makes the almost human difficult to identify, and revolting. Part of the disturbing power of zombies in film is their resemblance to living things, the fear we feel is due to their eerie resemblance to humans.  The next time that you encounter a wax museum, go inside and look closely at the figures. When you feel confused about whether the humanoid things you encounter are real, and revulsion at their waxy pallor and glazed expression, know that the feeling is called the Uncanny Valley effect.

http://www.amctv.com/shows/the-walking-dead/about

Mori, M. (1970). The Uncanny Valley. Energy 7(4), 33-35.

Yamada, Y., Kawabe, T., & Ihaya, K. (2013). Categorization difficulty is associated with negative evaluation in the "uncanny valley" phenomenon. Japanese Psychological Research, 55(1), 20-32.